Call of Duty is firmly in its slop era, and now it's Battlefield 6's game to lose

It's increasingly impossible to ignore how ugly Call of Duty has become. In the last few months alone, Black Ops 6 and Warzone have been infiltrated by cel-shaded Beavis and Butthead, American Dad, Jay and Silent Bob, and the Ninja Turtles.

Black Ops 6 is the latest casualty of Call of Duty's slop era: A parade of cartoonish cosplays, dizzying VFX, and Party City dress-up skins that, in just a few years, have eroded an identity Activision spent two decades building.

None of that is news, but how players are reacting to it is. Despite the popularity of absurd skins, there's a funk in the air. A lot of people are finally acknowledging the sorry state of Call of Duty, and they're particularly repelled by those Beavis and Butthead and American Dad skins that could've been ripped straight out of Fortnite. The straw might have finally broken the camel's back, and if that's the case, Call of Duty's oldest rival has an opportunity to put the "military" back in military shooters.

EA's pitch for Battlefield 6 is essentially what bleary-eyed Call of Duty fans wish Activision had in mind: No named operators with alternate costumes, just generic, artistically consistent soldiers. It's going for simple, boots-on-the-ground modern military fare directly inspired by Battlefields 3 and 4. Will Battlefield 6 also have ugly crossover skins? Time will tell, but the last few Battlefields have shown some restraint with immersion-shattering outfits.

What we know is that Battlefield 6 playtests have looked darn good: Dusty urban maps, crumbly destruction upgrades, and no goofy wingsuits to be seen (though it sure was fun to fly in BF2042).

Maybe time will prove me wrong, but I think it's telling that EA chose to announce Battlefield 6 with this key art:

Four soldiers, each representing a class, with their faces turned away from the camera. The focus isn't on the individual, it's on the action. (By the way, is that New York blowing up? Uh oh.)

Battlefield 6 is positioning itself as a throwback to simpler, slightly less greedy days for multiplayer shooters, and folks are latching on to it. But we'd be fools to be confident EA is gonna stick the landing. As promising as BF6 looks, there are some red flags—number one being an Ars Technica report that detailed EA's expectation that Battlefield 6 have 100 million players, a figure it plans to achieve by releasing a full-priced Battlefield 6 alongside a free battle royale mode. Maybe there's an opening for Warzone players to jump ship, but Call of Duty prioritizing a free-to-play audience is part of the reason it's gotten so bad.

Then there's the matter of classes. EA took a beating online after revealing Battlefield 6's weapons would be open to all classes like in BF2042—a deeply unpopular change among longtime fans that many assumed would be reversed given BF6's throwback posture.

This week, EA finally caved, saying an upcoming open beta would have playlists with closed and open weapon formats. Hey, listening to feedback is cool, but if Battlefield Studios leadership was that caught off guard by an impactful design choice people feel strongly about, you wonder what other tripping hazards are out there.

It's super unlikely that Battlefield 6 will come out swinging so hot it outsells Black Ops 7 (and Game Pass changes that equation, of course), but as far as the cultural victory, this is Battlefield's year to lose.

And lose it might: The last time Call of Duty and Battlefield faced off was 2021, a weak year for CoD that EA fumbled with an even weaker Battlefield 2042 launch. Thankfully, it got a lot better with time.